Gilbert Vasquez - Page 30

                                       - 30 -                                         
          at the time that respondent took the position in the litigation.            
          Coastal Petroleum Refiners v. Commissioner, 94 T.C. at 689.                 
               Ordinarily, we identify the point at which the United States           
          is first considered to have taken a position, determine what that           
          position was, and then decide whether that position, taken from             
          that point forward, was or was not substantially justified.                 
          Maggie Management Co. v. Commissioner, 108 T.C. at 442.                     
          Ordinarily, the position of the United States in the proceeding             
          in this Court is the position respondent sets forth in the                  
          answer.  Huffman v. Commissioner, 978 F.2d at 1147-1148; Maggie             
          Management Co. v. Commissioner, 108 T.C. at 442.                            
               1.  Summary and Conclusions                                            
               For purposes of section 7430, the position of the United               
          States in the proceeding in this Court is the position respondent           
          took in the answer–-that is, (1) petitioner was not entitled to             
          the earned income credit; (2) petitioner had not provided the               
          requested documentation to support his claimed earned income                
          credit; and (3) respondent did not have information as to the               
          truth of petitioner’s factual assertions as to petitioner’s                 
          eligibility for the earned income credit.                                   
               By the time respondent filed the answer, respondent did not            
          have any documentation supporting petitioner’s claimed earned               
          income credit.  We do not believe petitioner himself provided               
          such documentation; we do not believe petitioner provided such              






Page:  Previous  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011